September 5, 2011

"I'm not going to focus on that only because it's someone else's decision, so what's the point of answering that question? I'm focused on doing my job right and that's so far away and it's out of my control, so I just don't spend my time worrying about it. I spend my time worrying about my job, which is balancing the budget, getting this debt under control and creating the conditions that will get jobs created in this country."

216 comments:

I've only caught glimpses of this discussion because I'm not a regular Kleinite. But, it's nice to see two informed folks directly confront each other in a back and forth conversation, with a lot of detail and specifics.

No. Ryan is too much of a green-eyeshade sort of guy much better suited to leadership in the House or Senate where he can be a force for fiscal sanity providing leadership by dint of his command of financial/budgetary minutia. He's not a "big picture" (you know, that "vision thing") kinda guy needed to move the masses to action; rather, he has the personality and physical mien of a CPA. Most people self-select themselves into the slots in life in which they find themselves. Exceptions aside, there IS A REASON the sort of personality that becomes a CPA doesn't become a fighter pilot and visa versa. Ryans GOP polar opposite is Perry, whose personality was made for executive branch political life.

I'm sure the Demolitioncrats would LOVE to have Ryan as VP. It would take him out of a very powerful position in the House and promote him to one that has few responsibilities and virtually no influence on public policy -- unless a Senate vote ties; and how often does that happen? He would be a fool to accept if he was tapped for veep, unless he's ready to check out anyway.

Would a truly doggedly on-task type guy make a good President? Maybe not!

If the task is taking on all of a President's responsibilities on behalf of the entire US public, then a doggedly on-task type guy would wholly eclipse the glorious, viciously partisan Obama.

He's not a "big picture" (you know, that "vision thing") kinda guy needed to move the masses to action; rather, he has the personality and physical mien of a CPA.

Oh, sure. He only stood down the great eloquent Obama on the subject of the deficit, and he moved the masses of the House to pass his deficit-reduction plan last spring. Very few in the House are as articulate as he is, and nobody else, on either side of the aisle, has thought through a plan to systematically end the endless deficits - and put it up on a website for all to see.

You can demagogue against it, sure, but until you put your own plan up in public (no Democrat has the guts) your assertions are just wind.

Would a truly doggedly on-task type guy make a good President? Maybe not!

Two things:

1) Anytime I'm watching the news and they talk of what "may" happen, I think "may not" and tune them out. The same applies in reverse.

2) In this age of extreme frivolousness, there's a definite bias against seriousness - especially in a male. The bias, of course, is against males period (not much of a stretch for a feminist) because you don't hear ANY praise, nor is there even a search for, a "strong man" as there is for the Oprah-overloaded "strong woman," who is seemingly-everywhere. Let a strong male appear and the question of "is he too macho?" is bound to trailing not far behind. (Has anyone ever asked if a woman is "too strong"?)

All that said, when our problems are so specific - and fixable - why wouldn't "a truly doggedly on-task type guy make a good President?" Or a good anything else? Because he wouldn't pay attention to our bullshit? Well, if it's our adherence to bullshit that got us into this (and I would whole-heartedly suggest that it is) then maybe a non-destractable guy is just the remedy to the problem - the problem being, partially, our attraction to receiving attention for nothing much but trying not to be bored because, ultimately, we're boring.

We, in this case, being a nation ruled by hippies and the hippie mindset.

"Not even his constituents who he refuses to meet. Well that's not exactly true, he will for $15 with an appointment. Every prostitute has a price ya know."

Just like the above commenter's veracity is a prostitute to his ideology.

In fact, Ryan never charged anybody $15 to talk to him. The $15 admission fee was charged by the private organization (the Whitnall Park Rotary Club), in part to keep neofascist progressives like the above commenter from distrupting the meeting. And I'm sure it worked like a charm, because progressives don't like to pay for anything out of pocket.

Nah, progressives are known for their little kristallnacht street theater protests with property destruction and multiple arrests for civil disobedience. And for flooding the zone with invective, gainsaying, and name calling. Progressives should embrace their inner fascist nature. Come out of the closet! Your brown shirts and armbands await you.

Greenspan said that the only President that he had encountered who was thoroughly sane was Ford-- and Ford was an accidental President. Both Ryan and Chrystie seem sane and modest. That will probably disqualify them.

I would never argue that Ryan is totally inarticulate or that he would be a poor chief executive, only that , unfortunately the qualities that one needs to get elected to the Presidency are NOT the qualities needed to "run the government" (a dubious concept in and of itself) once elected--as the mere existence of Obama glaringly testifies. Perry, by contrast, seems to have a better mix of the two qualities needed to succeed at both tasks. The greatest "policy wonk" in the world is no good if he a) can't get elected and/or b) once elected, can't move both the nation and Congress to action by convincing both of the necessity of his agenda--that "vision thing" again--arguably possession of which the reason Regan won election originally and the lack thereof the reason Bush 41 lost his own re-election.

I would agree that if Ryan was the nominee (or Christie or Daniels), then the POTUS Obama team would be nervous. (Disclosure: I have been told this by many super K-street consultants.)

No one says that it is likely that Ryan will be the VP. Many reasons. One is that he (Ryan) does not care much of Perry or Romney. Second is that he believes that GOP will lose the fight and it would be best for him to be ready in 2016.

The verdict is unchanged: GOP is trashed everywhere by the POTUS. Every where. No place to hide for the GOP. Why? Because GOP has not had any deliverables, no vision, no diversity platform, no leadership in the world, etcetera.

At this point in time Americans are so People Magazine minded, celebrity-reality TV minded and enamored with the flashy = competence myth that someone like Paul Ryan is a an unknown known. Or is it unknown unknown?

Or maybe he is just an alien.

How about Sec Treasury in the next administration? Wherever, he has to be given a hand in us becoming financially responsible nation once again, as he seems to be one of the minority of adults left in the room known as DC.

(Imagine George Washington, Thomas Jeffereson, John Adams and the like being evaluated by today's press and people?

Booooring!!!!

They were doggedly focused on the task of starting a country based on idea which never had been formulated into a working model, much a less a functioning country. Obama should be embarrassed that he tried to to be in their lineage.)

When we get over the childish need for someone flashy to be POTUS and want someone who does the job, does it efficiently, without petty petulence, and keeps the ideals of this unique and exceptional American model of citizens owning and running their lives and mutually taking care of their international identity and welfare ....)

Well, maybe we'll be through with this asinine redistributive and humans rights squashing form of federally funded personality cultism at some point.

in part to keep neofascist progressives like the above commenter from distrupting the meeting.

Actually progressives were counter demonstrating the nazi rally in West Allis [note, not Madison] on Saturday. Wait, Althouse didn't let you in on that one? Shame! Where were conservatives that day I wonder. Apparently they were fine with nazi rallies. Hmmph.

Elected Republicans aren't nearly as dumb as their base, they will never put RyanCare on the national ticket, he is after all, the 3rd least popular Republican in America. While Ryan is sipping $300 wine with billionaires and calling the police on his constitutients, his challenger Rob Zerban is doing listening sessions at taverns where real folk are drinking $2 tappers.

Doesn't this news frustrate the "top runners?" Isn't there something "vanilla" about the GOP where no one comes up with a plan that satifies a majority of voters?

Yesterday, I saw a comment at a Breitbart's link ... that I thought was just top notch! The person goes by the handle: Clarity In LA. (Or, as spelled: Clarityinla). Take a look at these 13 proposals. (And even if you don't pick all of them ... why aren't these proposals on the table, yet?)

1) Repeal Obamacare

2) Repeal Dodd-Frank "Be big to fail," instead.

3) Reform the tax code.

4) Cut down the Fed's size!

5) Reform Social security. Don't destroy it!

6) Tighten borders. This was a good one: "Issue ID cards for every single person who works in the US coming in from foreign countries. Create a database. Allow workers to cross our borders as long as they are working.

7) Require legal residence/job/taxes of aliens IF they want to use entitlements such as education, medical. Etc. For themselves or family members.

8) Allow for vouchers to replace all Federal funding of schools.

9) End corporate welfare and crony capitalism. (Sarah Palin has already said this.)

10) Legalize marijuana. Or allow states to control this. Take the Feds AWAY! (This even helps Mexico.)

11) Prevent the spread of Sharia Law. RE-STATED: No other laws supersedes our US Constitution.

12) Require ALL voters to show a valid PICTURE ID. It must contain a "mark" that you are eligible to vote.

13) Allow states to decide if they want to drill for oil. This is not a Federal decision policy!

Yes, JAL, if you're not at least a semi "hipster" anymore one need not apply. Think of a Taft or even TR and his mustache (remember, one of John Bolton's main criticisms--besides the fact he has no name recognition--concerns the size of his mustache). Short, gray-haired and/or bald(ing) un-telegenic oldish-looking (whether actually truly old or not) white men need not apply--no matter HOW qualified, knowledgeable, articulate and/or experienced they are..

He seems more interested and better suited to become Treasury Secretary; or, as others have implied, there are other positions (in the executive and legislative branches) which require similarly qualified individuals.

It is a mistake to assign a near divine status to executive roles (especially president) exclusively, and to disregard the other roles which also demand individuals of integrity.

JAL / Virgil X.: Americans can elect radically different leaders if they need to. Look at David Dinkins, who lost to Rudy Giuliani in 1993. Obama is in a simiar situation. There is no way that he can hang on to the presidency. Americans want a more competent leader; and are going to be looking to the GOP to provide one.

"No question now, what had happened to the faces of the pigs. The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which."

J said...C-bob-- yr too stupid to be online trash, where yr life is in jeopardy, mafia swine

got that, tough teabagger trash

9/5/11 12:38 PM

The only good communist is dead communist. Now run off and be a good communist and just fuck off and die already. You are truly the dumbest and most obnoxious asshole commenter ever. Seriously, fuck off and die already. And have a nice day.

Virgil says: "He's not a "big picture" (you know, that "vision thing") kinda guy needed to move the masses to action; rather, he has the personality and physical mien of a CPA."

Yes, that's what it is. I have a finance background and when I see certain politicians speak, I just roll my eyes and think "that person wouldn't last 1 month out in the real world". Ryan is more like a finance-type person than a ranting politicians.

Scott said...JAL / Virgil X.: Americans can elect radically different leaders if they need to. Look at David Dinkins, who lost to Rudy Giuliani in 1993. Obama is in a simiar situation. There is no way that he can hang on to the presidency. Americans want a more competent leader; and are going to be looking to the GOP to provide one.

9/5/11 1:11 PM

You pegged it right. Obama is the second coming of Dinkins and not of Carter. By the way both men can die happy knowing that Obama has them beat in the worst ever category. As for Ryan he should stay where he is. The next president is going to need a details man to keep him or her from going wobbly. Who will be Ryan's counterpart in the senate?

Restaurant food in Norway is insanely expensive. And, I'm not talking about especially high end places. For example at a basic eatery it cost thirty bucks for a bowl of broccoli soup, which was a side.

And btw, the food is terrible. Expensive and terrible!

I'll take some PBR and a microwaved pot (not the "medicinal" sorta pot) pie from an American dive-bar any day.

The sun on the meadow is summery warmThe deer in the forests run freeBut gathered together to greet the storm Tomorrow belongs to me

The branch on the maple is leafy and greenThe children are laughing with gleeBut somewhere a glory awaits unseenTomorrow belongs to me

Obama, Obama, please show us the signYour children have waited to seeThe morning will come When the world is mineTomorrow belongs to meTomorrow belongs to meTomorrow belongs to meTomorrow belongs to me

The babe in his cradle is closing his eyesThe blossom embraces the beeBut soon says the whisper, arise, ariseTomorrow belongs to meTomorrow belongs to me

@J: The National Socialist German Workers' Party was not a leftist movement? Who knew?

That must be why they ended up with an uber-capitalist society, practicing democracy and devoted to individual freedom just like the other right-wing utopias. You know Red China, the USSR, Cuba, etc. ROTFLMAO

Restaurant food in Norway is insanely expensive. And, I'm not talking about especially high end places. For example at a basic eatery it cost thirty bucks for a bowl of broccoli soup, which was a side.

And btw, the food is terrible. Expensive and terrible!

I'll take some PBR and a microwaved pot (not the "medicinal" sorta pot) pie from an American dive-bar any day.

9/5/11 1:45 PM

You are right about Norway, my sister was just there and made the same observation. Cheaper to visit Norway by cruise ship. And the food would be better as well.

30 neo-Nazis; 100 Police, 2000 counterprotesters. 5 arrests, but no word if any of them were neo-Nazis. Seems like there was a confrontation amongst the counter protesters themselves.5 arrested at neo-Nazi rally

Makes sense that the right wing wouldn't be there: they ain't got no experience at that kind of thing, so leave it to the professionals. It does look like there was a dearth of giant puppets, though. Maybe the rain wrecks the paper mache'?

yr wrong again like yr dyslexic hero Goldberg. Nationalism is not socialism. You don't know fuck about Hegel or Marx anyway. The nazis had banks, allowed the aristocrats, were capitalist. Not bolsheviks, dumbass.

I think what J misses, and what is ever more evident with this Administration, is that crony capitalism is just another form of socialism. It is not capitalism. The companies are not competing in the market place, but rather in the halls of Congress and at raising cash for Obama's reelection.

Probably the seminal book on this was "The Road to Serfdom", written contemporaneously to Stalin, Mussolini, and Hitler by Hayek. Everything since, by the likes of J, to characterize the Nazis and Fascists as right wing is mere historical and economic revisionism.

The Nazis gave the big companies a choice - they could work closely with the government and thrive, or they could be destroyed. Most picked working closely with the government, which is why so many of the big German companies at the time ended up using slave or concentration camp labor.

Think of the slave labor as similar to tax breaks, TARP money, and green energy subsidies, such as GE has acquired under Obama. They give the company a big advantage in the market.

No, this isn't real capitalism, but rather, the crony capitalism of Mussolini and Hitler modernized and grafted onto the U.S. system, but without the nationalistic bent of Naziism.

Paul Ryan came to the battle with facts and faced down the Obama rhetoric machine...and won! There was no discussion of debt and entitlements until Ryan brought his plan forward and the Tea Party picked up speed. The GOP was pissed at Ryan and wanted Obama to drown in his own rhetoric, preferring they wait for him to come up with something and then they could pick it apart.

Ryan, showed them up and the Tea Party rewarded him for having the courage to say, "this is the issue, this is right and I'm bringing it forward to save this country, policitally correct or not." No conservative worth their salt will ever forget that about Paul Ryan.

We will also not forget Obama inviting him and sitting him in the front row at his speech and then proceeding to mock him and his plan. Obama is graceless...a sure sign of new power like new money...the constant need to flaunt it.

The question posed here regarding Ryan or any candidate is the problem. You are asking the wrong question(s) and they are the same ones that got us Obama. Let the candidates come to us, let them frame the questions with their ideas and philosophies, let them tell us what they think this country needs...and then let us decide who makes the most sense.

The question on Ryan is the cart before the horse. You can have no idea of who Ryan will be because you have framed him in your limited view before he presents himself. Then he has to spend the rest of the time beating back your preconceived idea of him.

Tonight they are starting "The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills" on schedule. There was some doubt that would happen as one of the husbands of one of the girls killed himself a few weeks ago because of how he is portrayed on the show.

Many, many more millions of people know who that guy (Russell Armstrong) is than know who Paul Ryan is. I know youse guys do not. But some perspective is in order. Just sayn'

Let me also add that neo-Nazis are not Nazis. The one thing that they share is their belief in white supremacy, along with the name. And, that is about it.

I will postulate that they picked the name in order to horrify the rest of the country. Aryan Nation probably does the same sort of thing, for similar historic reasons - despite the reality that there are probably real Aryan nations already in existence, i.e. India and Iran (no, the Aryans were not blond Nordic types - the word is derived from Sanskrit, and Iran means the land of the Aryan).

Ryan is just where is should be. Spending bills start in the House, and having a green eye shades type of guy overseeing them is just what we need to pare down the size of the federal government to manageable levels.

Besides, what would he do as either a cabinet secretary or President? The money is already allocated by then by Congress. All he could do would be to go back to Congress and ask them to cut here and there - the courts made this explicit by rejecting Nixon's attempt to not spend money allocated by Congress.

AndjFellowRepublican said... "Rubio is not eligible-- not a natural born Citizen, since he was born to NON US Citizen resident aliens in Miami."

"Where is SevenMachos when you need him?"

7 Machos is only posing as a Conservative. What sort of Conservative doesn't care about the rule of law and the Constitution? Besides, I've blown ALL of his silly arguments (as well as all the rest here) out of the water.

BH:Obama(and Nazi)-like socialism and crony capitalism was responsible for slaves in America.

The point was that in both cases, the government is giving large companies perks, advantages, and benefits for working closely with it. In the case of those German companies, it was low cost or no cost labor, and in our case, it is giving them tax breaks, sweat heart contracts, and a lot of money.

Paul Ryan's signature proposals have senior citizens crapping in their Depends from sheer terror. For no reason. Nothing he's proposed affects anyone over 55. But even Ann, who is 60, in one of her bloggingheads episodes said Paul Ryan "scares" her. And without the Curmudgeon Bloc, a race for the White House is futile.

So to answer the question, he's not going anywhere near the executive branch of government.

I'd say that in our own history our government stopped slavery in a situation where the private sector would have continued to use it because it made financial sense.

So, maybe you shouldn't get so carried away w/ your metaphysical certitude as you assure us that businesses would never use slaves unless the gov made them do it. Sometimes it takes the gov to make them stop.

So, this makes the point that businesses need to be limited from doing whatever it is that makes them the most dough. Presumably slavery isn't the only situation where it's good to have the gov regulate businesses. I know some folks who are hardcore cons, and they've made hundreds of millions of dollars, and they hate regulations. But, even they realize that too little regulation can kill real-world capitalism even faster than too much.

Let me also clarify a bit. Crony capitalism is not capitalism, as that term is typically used and contrasted to socialism (just like Neo-Nazis are not Nazis, because there is no reason to believe that the former have any interest in the economic policies of the later).

Capitalism, as that term is usually used, is an economic system where firms compete against each other for buyers, and the ones that best serve their customers, while keeping their costs in line, etc. succeed, and those that don't fail. Think Adam Smith.

Crony Capitalism, on the other hand, bypasses the market, and wins by getting the government to give it special deals. The firm with the best product at the best price often does not win in this sort of economic system. Rather, the company with the best contacts and relations with those running the government often does.

The real heart of capitalism is with small and medium sized businesses. That is where most the jobs are created, and that is where most of the innovations happen (or maybe happened, with the Senate poised to pass "Patent Reform" tomorrow night - another blatant example of crony capitalism).

But large governments prefer dealing with large companies. They can bring a couple of people in the room, tell them what to do, and what they are going to give them to do it, and it happens. Hitler had his Krupp, Benz, BMW, Bayer, etc. and the present Administration has its GE, IBM, GM, UAW, etc. Everyone knows the game, and everyone at the table is playing. And, so, NBC/MSNBC turned into a mouthpiece for the Obama Administration, and its parent company at the time (GE) got TARP funds and a lot of green energy money. Everyone wins, except, of course, for those left paying for it.

Make no mistake - the Nazis were consummate planners, and that extended to their economy. National production was planned down to the widget, and implemented through a close relationship between those same large companies that received those benefits I mentioned above. Sounds a bit like a 5-year plan, except that the Germans appear to have been better at it than the Russians ever were.

There are a lot of problems though with this sort of system. First, and most obviously, the economic results are sub-optimal. How could they not be? The competitive market is being bypassed by K-street lobbyists.

Second, as Hayek pointed out almost 60 years ago, the natural result of this sort of socialism, just like with the Marxist version, is a loss of civil liberties. Those who don't want to play by the rigged rules must be made to play and pay.

So, we have raids on the Gibson guitar plants by the feds, who, conveniently ignored similar, if not identical, issues with their competitors, who coincidentally contributed to Democrats. And, we have the Clinton Administration having the IRS audit Republicans, on the basis of their opposition to the divine leadership of Hillary and Bill Clinton.

Actually J is an acquried taste with a strong opinion and a unique way of presenting it. He has a point of view and is trying to find a way to express in his jazzy improv style. I know that the personal attacks can be annoying but who am I to critize that since I love personal attacks my ownself.

I like to hear someone who thinks so much differently than me. You need both sugar and mustard. You shouldn't get caught up in his name calling. It's just a motif like garage's idoicy and Cedarffords anti-semitism.

He brings a lot to the blog in my humble opinion. Another voice that we should here. Just sayn'

Another similarity between the Nazis and the present Administration, along with the "progressives" that staff it and put it into power - gun control.

The Nazis very quickly disarmed their populace after coming to power. How else could they expect to be able to exterminate entire ethnic groups without getting shot when they show up at the door of those to be exterminated?

The Germans, being German, apparently quite happily turned over their guns when told to. The progressives here are having a bit more of a problem.

The problem is that in order for a socialist government to succeed, it must monopolize the mechanisms of force and violence, because it will inevitably diminish the civil liberties and economic wealth of the majority to benefit the minority in power. And, thus, it must have a monopoly of power, so that it can not be effectively resisted by those who do not benefit from the resulting new order.

(And, that is why it is credible that Operation Fast and Furious was the result of an attempt to give guns a bad name, and, ultimately to further limit their availability).

"He brings a lot to the blog in my humble opinion. Another voice that we should here."

@TrooperYork: Yeah, calling people "Jewboy" or "queer" really brings a lot to the blog. A lot of what, though?

I mean, when I get called those things, I find it difficult to respond to or even discern anything substantive that he might be struggling to say. He's like the screaming child in the supermarket. You can try to speak in normal tones with your spouse in front of the canned English peas, but then the child's scream just stops conversation dead.

In a small child, a scream is at least excusable. In an adult,flooding the zone with invective isn't.

So no, he doesn't bring anything worthwhile to the table, and he doesn't deserve any respect.

Bruce H, as someone who worked in corporate accounting for large companies, I can confirm what you say. My employers gave money to whoever was in office, Republican and Democrat, in order to buy access to the office holder. Then they could get legislation passed that was at least somewhat less harmful (say, limits on debit card fees for example).

Teachers and Unions need to learn how to grease both wheels.

They also got free money to build a facility, such as a distribution center.

But on the other hand, they also saw the bad things gov't did. All the laws and regulations and race baiting and fake but accurate lawsuits that costs company millions and millions a year in wasted money.

What more resembles the current situation is Peronism.At the rate we are going we will become Argentina. And that is not a good thing.

Trooper: unlike other commenters here of a progressive bent J is beyond the pale. Cedaford the anti-semite is nearly there but J is beyond the pale.

Scott said... I don't speak German so Ican't comment on your entire translation but I do know enough that I didn't call him a communist MoFo. I did say its too bad his prostitute mother didn't have an abortion. He likes to throw bad spanish in his rants so just for giggles I told him to to eff of and die in spanish among other things.

Scott said... Ron Paul as president and Kinky Friedman as VP now that is sight worth seeing. Can you imagine Cederford and J at the "they ain't making Jews like Jesus anymore" sing-along?

@cubanbob: Did you go over to translate.google.com and try it? Sometimes their xlations aren't even in the ballpark. Try translating something from Spanish into German and then back into Spanish again.

Yes, the world would be a better place if we had a vice-president named "Kinky." Maybe it would convince people not to take it all too fucking seriously.

As someone who doesn't comment much on politics at Althouse, I must say I am most impressed by "J". His/her comments are measured, intelligent, thoughtful, and by far some of the most articulate on this blog. I have read every comment and absorbed the meaning and find myself thinking differently about political matters all thanks to the deep thinking J.

Now, that's stupidity, with a capital S. Hayek's a laughing stock for pro. economists (even slightly conservative ones)--another gold standard libertarian who thinks if you just ..let the rich do what they want, everything will work out.

So, are you admitting that Nobel Laureates are not omniscient? If, so, lets start the laughing with former Enron advisor Paul Krugman, and his repeated claims that if we had just doubled down on the "stimulus", we wouldn't be in this recession.

The reason that Hayek's book reverberates is that it was written while these socialist regimes were at their heights. Not, 60 years later, after much of the socialism has been written out through revisionism by progressive historians and economists uncomfortable with the reality of what was going on.

His message is still valid today - that socialism naturally and inevitably begets authoritarian repression, often at the point of a gun. His three examples were, you guessed it, the Soviet Union under Stalin, Germany under Hitler, and Italy under Mussolini. The academics trying to prove otherwise just beclown themselves.

"As someone who doesn't comment much on politics at Althouse, I must say I am most impressed by "J". His/her comments are measured, intelligent, thoughtful, and by far some of the most articulate on this blog. I have read every comment and absorbed the meaning and find myself thinking differently about political matters all thanks to the deep thinking J.

Bravo!"

For your benefit, I have posted a mashup of J's most measured, intelligent, thoughtful, and articulate comments on this thread. Unfortunately, J deleted the anti-semitic ones directed at me. It's hard to imagine that his self-censorship was motivated by shame rather than mere expediency, but whatever. Maybe he will repost his Jew-baiting just for you. Enjoy.

=====[measured, intelligent, thoughtful commentary follows]=====

Prez?? Heh. Ryan should run for like Randian assclown of America. RAA! A is, indubitably, A.

Heh. You mean... neo-fascist Randian assclowns-- like Ryan, and you, Scott-tard, and the Smurfhouse

C-bob-- yr too stupid to be online trash, where yr life is in jeopardy, mafia swine

got that, tough teabagger trash

This pro-Ryan post is probably via orders from RushBo, carney-perp-in-chief

Actually Squat, yr wrong again--Im an anti-idiot . When some illiterate biz major jaggoff--ie, you-- starts calling nazis progressives--that tends to irk reasonable people. Same effect when reading some brainfarts by like Goldberg, or Snouthammer, Ryan, most A-tards

yr wrong again like yr dyslexic hero Goldberg. Nationalism is not socialism. You don't know fuck about Hegel or Marx anyway. The nazis had banks, allowed the aristocrats, were capitalist. Not bolsheviks, dumbass.

No, Alex dumbass--like the demonic POS Goldberg, you simply don't know fuck about WWII, or world politics. Nazis may have been statists--then so is the USA, and most govts. Not bolsheviks, dreck. --they hated the marxists . But no use trying to explain shit to white trash who think Ron Paul or Sarah Klondike are reasonable people.

Yo Alex the demonic bag of teabag shit---I didn't claim republicans are nazis. garag did. There might be some wannabes--Mitt Romneytoids, even some Paultards--but they're too stupid and incompetent to be nazis---see Althouse for examples .

Anyone who takes some bag of dreck like Goldberg seriously doesn't know jack about politics.

Really there's no point in arguing with humans infected with the "Ayn Rand disorder", garag.

Sure, shithead. The LA DA would be far more interested in people who disagree with you, than your own threats of physical violence - including shooting people.

Not that any competent DA, would consider your hissy fits anything more than we do here - another internet dweeb's tough guy delusions.

And Trooper, he adds nothing whatsoever to any conversation that's worth the cost of trying to decipher his disjointed rants or wading through his verbal diarrhea. You need to up your game considerably if you think he does. The guy is pitiable. Don't enable him.

His message is still valid today - that socialism naturally and inevitably begets authoritarian repression, often at the point of a gun. His three examples were, you guessed it, the Soviet Union under Stalin, Germany under Hitler, and Italy under Mussolini. The academics trying to prove otherwise just beclown themselves.

Actually, the people beclowning themselves are the ones comparing the economy in the US today to the economies of totalitarian states. And incidentally, Hayek was not opposed to some level of a social safety net, which is all that's on the table with Obama or anyone else in the political mainstream.

Trooper. I admire your open mind and your comments are both witty and biting. But you do improvisational jazz a very bad turn by comparing J's hideous attempt to be Joycean or noir to jazz which is premised on honesty. His "riffs" are a comlilation of wikipedia insights, fake Spanish and left field puking of misunderstood philosophical tracts. Even early in the day the posts are shallow and devolve as the time passes. Y.ou are a very thoughtful poster who is very supportive of open dialogue and have stood behind some real assholes in a very helpful way. But i know jazz and J Is not up to the art.

I think the progressive and libertarian clusters talk past each other because to progressives, it's about personality (Stalin, Hitler, and Mussolini) while for libertarians it's about process and institutions. Progressives can't seem to wrap their minds around the notion that fascism and naziism are about philosophies independent of the persons who promoted them -- philosophies very much like their own in terms of means and ends.

Back in the day we used to go to this bar on Court St called Cousins. What wsa different about it was it wasn't the usual neighborhood gin mill with a bunch of guineas and micks farting and earting hard boiled eggs. There were hot latin chicks and nurses from Long Island College Hospital and black chicks with Angela Davis afros and an attitude.

They had a stand up piano and had jazz every night. Often they hired young girls just starting out in the music business. There is nothing like listening to a skinny young white girl fresh from Kansas singing Billie Holiday. She wanted to have soul but didn't have the esperiance. So she warbled in the background while you tried to pick up chicks at the bar.

You see it's all jazz. It might be bad jazz. Sad jazz. Not to your taste. But she might have got better. You have to give people a chance. Just my opinion.